I believe my cliff scene is approaching its terminal state. Many things have
been happening since my last post on this subject, not the least one being
that I have reduced render time from 15 hours to about 3 hours (without the
plants) or 4 hours (with the plants).

["By Jove! I exclaimed, how did you achieve that, Holmes?"
 "Elementary, my dear Watson. It was just a case of mind over matter."
 (from: The Mistery of the Purloined Isosurface) ]

Well, the main secret was that I cut up the isosurface in two separate ones:
the cliff, and the landscape. And that made a whole lot of differences!
Obvious, you would say, but not for me :-)  I had to learn the hard way.
Another, slight speed imporvement, was to have the rotation of the cliff
inside the function, and not through the isosurface object.
Otherwise, I used Rune Johansen's furtex for the landscape, which gave it a
smoother aspect, and I re-modelled the floating seeds. The reddish bush-like
things were made and planted with the neat little macros of Bill Pragnell.
Thanks Bill!

So... what do you think??

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Cliff_14.jpg' (44 KB)

Preview of image 'Cliff_14.jpg'

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> I believe my cliff scene is approaching its terminal state. Many things have
> been happening since my last post on this subject, not the least one being
> that I have reduced render time from 15 hours to about 3 hours (without the
> plants) or 4 hours (with the plants).
> 
> ["By Jove! I exclaimed, how did you achieve that, Holmes?"
>  "Elementary, my dear Watson. It was just a case of mind over matter."
>  (from: The Mistery of the Purloined Isosurface) ]
> 
> Well, the main secret was that I cut up the isosurface in two separate ones:
> the cliff, and the landscape. And that made a whole lot of differences!
> Obvious, you would say, but not for me :-)  I had to learn the hard way.
> Another, slight speed imporvement, was to have the rotation of the cliff
> inside the function, and not through the isosurface object.
> Otherwise, I used Rune Johansen's furtex for the landscape, which gave it a
> smoother aspect, and I re-modelled the floating seeds. The reddish bush-like
> things were made and planted with the neat little macros of Bill Pragnell.
> Thanks Bill!
> 
> So... what do you think??
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 


just amazing ....

would love to see a waterfall rinsing over the cliffs edge ;-)

... dave

Post a reply to this message

> So... what do you think??

Hmm... frankly, I like it.

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:

> 
> So... what do you think??

Good work. I think this is a great improvement to the image.  It is 
beginning to communicate the sense of fecundity observed through the 
lense of an alien world.  I would suggest pushing it farther creating 
more variety, greater sense of swelling, pregnancy, ripening, 
death/rebirth.  But that can be left for a second state.

As I posted before, this theme is very close to my heart.  An artist who 
I always thought explored this realm was Charles Burchfield

http://tinyurl.com/9a4z2

particularily with images like:

http://tinyurl.com/ajho5


A more famous artist of the same time and inclination was

Authur Dove

http://tinyurl.com/dps45

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote:
>(...)
>
> So... what do you think??
>
> Thomas

Wow, it's really nice! The almost maroon cliffs contrast well with the
greens and yellows of the landscape. I wish it was a bit bigger- it's hard
to see the structure of the falling spore-things, and your baloon model is
almost lost. Maybe it could be brighter and/or closer? Or is there some way
you could move it to see its shadow on the landscape? Right now, its really
hard to tell how far away it is, and thus give a sense of scale to the
whole image.

Anyway, I discovered a similar thing the other day with some isosurfaces I
was playing with. Better to separate when one can!

Nice image.

Stefan

Post a reply to this message

When can we expect to see the final version on Zazzle? ;-)

[Well, I'd _consider_ buying anyway... not sure if I definitely would. LOL!]

Post a reply to this message

Fascinating. Beautiful.
Physics question:
What's the yellow star thing meant to be?
It's obviously not a prime source of illumination and two suns in the same 
system doesn't make a lot of sense.
DLM

Post a reply to this message

"dlm" <me### [at] addressinvalid> schreef in bericht
news:43d42b4a$1@news.povray.org...
> Fascinating. Beautiful.
> Physics question:
> What's the yellow star thing meant to be?
> It's obviously not a prime source of illumination and two suns in the same
> system doesn't make a lot of sense.
> DLM
>
>

Thank you!
Still, there are two suns in this system! Not impossible in nature: last
year, astronomers found a planet in a three star system!
Here the (small) yellow sun is far away, about the distance of Pluto or even
more. Its light is overshadowed by the prime source. Even so, in this scene,
it is a light source too, contributing slightly to the whole.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"David El Tom" <dav### [at] t-onlinede> schreef in bericht
news:43d38a0d$1@news.povray.org...
>
> just amazing ....
>
> would love to see a waterfall rinsing over the cliffs edge ;-)
>

Oh dear...! That would be a challenge... Shall think about it for a next
avatar of this scene (cannot promise anthing, though)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v2" <voi### [at] devnull> schreef in bericht
news:43d3915d$1@news.povray.org...
> > So... what do you think??
>
> Hmm... frankly, I like it.

My sincere thanks; so do I ;-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:43d3aa09$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Good work. I think this is a great improvement to the image.  It is
> beginning to communicate the sense of fecundity observed through the
> lense of an alien world.  I would suggest pushing it farther creating
> more variety, greater sense of swelling, pregnancy, ripening,
> death/rebirth.  But that can be left for a second state.
>
Thank you Jim! Much appreciated.
The render time I have won from the isosurface can be spent now in more
subtle details, especially the foreground that still needs attention. The
idea of a (thin) waterfall from the cliff also attracts me. I have to think
about that... It would simbolize the two-way system of this ecology: up and
down the cliff.

> As I posted before, this theme is very close to my heart.  An artist who
> I always thought explored this realm was Charles Burchfield
> A more famous artist of the same time and inclination was
> Authur Dove
>
Indeed! Especially Arthur Dove, who is a tiny little bit closer to my
likings. Thanks for drawing my attention to them.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Smws" <smw### [at] poboxcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.43d3c3f07e4cb3a3641d079c0@news.povray.org...
>
> Wow, it's really nice! The almost maroon cliffs contrast well with the
> greens and yellows of the landscape. I wish it was a bit bigger- it's hard
> to see the structure of the falling spore-things, and your baloon model is
> almost lost. Maybe it could be brighter and/or closer? Or is there some
way
> you could move it to see its shadow on the landscape? Right now, its
really
> hard to tell how far away it is, and thus give a sense of scale to the
> whole image.
>
Thank you indeed, Stefan!
Yes, the size is small, mainly for render time purposes. My final image will
be much larger in any case, rendering in several successive stages over a
couple of days and reassembling everything afterwards.
Yes, the balloon is closer that it looks and its shadow is somewhere outside
the left border. I shall see what I can do... It is an important feature
because I intend it to be kind of scale element.

> Anyway, I discovered a similar thing the other day with some isosurfaces I
> was playing with. Better to separate when one can!
>
Yep! I thought I was being smart by keeping everything in one single
function :-)  Initially, it was a kind of exercise to increase my knowledge
of isosurfaces and the handling of them. In that sense, I am very satisfied.
In parallel, I did the same exercise using iso_csg, but I have not reached
as far, but the results are promising, and you have to think a little
differently.
By the way, although not vsisble in this scene, the cliff extends much
farther away. It bends to the left and goes off to the horizon. In a later
stage, I want to build a cliff with different offsets.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v2" <voi### [at] devnull> schreef in bericht
news:43d3c54e$1@news.povray.org...
> When can we expect to see the final version on Zazzle? ;-)
>
> [Well, I'd _consider_ buying anyway... not sure if I definitely would.
LOL!]

Ah well.... who knows? At the moment, that is not my main focus... But if I
do, I'll come pounding at your door!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:

> subtle details, especially the foreground that still needs attention. The
> idea of a (thin) waterfall from the cliff also attracts me. 

Me too

Post a reply to this message

I think it's brilliant. The landscape truly looks the scale it should be, at
least for this image size. It may look more model-like at larger
resolutions. If you can preserve this intricacy in a bigger image it'll be
amazing.

I'm happy with a double star - they are, after all, at least as common as
lone stars!

I think it might benefit from a more pronounced horizon gradient though -
either a second layer of (very thin) fog to a greater altitude, or a
gradient pattern on the sky object.

Keep it up!

Bill

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.43d4a6287e4cb3a3731f01d10@news.povray.org...
> I think it's brilliant. The landscape truly looks the scale it should be,
at
> least for this image size. It may look more model-like at larger
> resolutions. If you can preserve this intricacy in a bigger image it'll be
> amazing.
>
> I'm happy with a double star - they are, after all, at least as common as
> lone stars!
>
> I think it might benefit from a more pronounced horizon gradient though -
> either a second layer of (very thin) fog to a greater altitude, or a
> gradient pattern on the sky object.
>
> Keep it up!
>

Thanks, Bill! This is indeed the first stage where I begin to feel it is a
'mature' scene. It is slow work but within acceptable margins. When
necessary, I use the isosurface approximation macro to get rough bearings.

Yes, I wonder about the larger resolution too. Everything depends, I
believe, on the foreground. If that is too schematic or primitive, the scene
will not pass the test. So, more work there is needed anyway.

Horizon gradient: yes indeed. My idea is/was to have a thin cloud layer
somewhere halfway up the cliff in the background. I tried with Gilles Tran's
makecloud macro, but was not successful yet (cloud would not appear). I have
to experiment more, or try other things, or go for a second thin fog
probably. Stay tuned!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

> > > So... what do you think??

> Thomas


It's great, would also like to see an even bigger one.
Im also interested in that perfect moon... so just tell me it's an image.

I never was quite happy with my moon after trying out different ideas on
this image: http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/9701/castlevania7rw.jpg

In the event that it is done in Pov.. HOW DID U DO IT!? =)

Post a reply to this message

"RusHHouR" <gee### [at] mailnu> schreef in bericht
news:web.43d53c657e4cb3a347d3ae5e0@news.povray.org...
>
> > > > So... what do you think??
>
> > Thomas
>
>
> It's great, would also like to see an even bigger one.
> Im also interested in that perfect moon... so just tell me it's an image.
>
> I never was quite happy with my moon after trying out different ideas on
> this image: http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/9701/castlevania7rw.jpg
>
> In the event that it is done in Pov.. HOW DID U DO IT!? =)
>
>
All done in POV with image_map and bump_map of the Moon, uv_mapped on a
sphere!! The recipe comes from Bill Pragnell. Here follows the transcript of
a couple of messages that will help you on your way:

====== start of transcript ========
Alien beach: 23-11-2005
Instead of using the normal sky_sphere, use a regular hollow sphere big
enough to enclose your scene. Give it the required colour gradient and a
partial transparency, ambient 1, diffuse 0. Put your moon outside the sky
sphere, and the parts in shadow will then have the same colour as the local
sky. You might need to tweak the sky transparency and colour a bit - the
colour gradient ends up being a little darker than on a regular sky_sphere.

This is exactly what I used in my ringworld scene to make the shadowed arch
areas sky-coloured. Sometimes I don't even bother using a colour gradient
on the sky - a ground fog can usually produce the desired effect (this is
of course similar to how sky gradients work in real life, too).

Very easy once you've done it a couple of times!

Bill

Moon recipe: 4-12-2005
In alien beach (Bill Pragnell, 21-11-2005) described the way to make a nice
moon in the sky.

I tried that successfully, until I tried to use radiosity too. The problem
was that light was scattered back to the dark surface of the moon.

The neat solution to that is to use also an interior_texture for the object
you use as sky sphere (which could be anything, including a vertical plane
like in the image below).

Make the side turned towards the universe (and the moon) totally dark (rgb
0) transmit doesn't matter; and the side towards the camera with the usual
texture as described by Bill. Now you can use radiosity in your scene,
without the lighting up of the shadowy part of the moon!!!

Thomas
====== end of transcript ========

So simple! and giving a great effect!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote:

> All done in POV with image_map and bump_map of the Moon, uv_mapped on a
> sphere!!...
>
>
>
>... So simple! and giving a great effect!
> Thomas

A big thank you for collecting all that info and handing it right to me!
Very nice! I will try it out, and I have already seen the great result!
Thanks again!

RusHHouR

Post a reply to this message